Styx

If you didn't do so already, you need to transfer the images you save on your computer to an imageshack/photobook account, and then transfer them from there via the link displayed on account, to the forum. I notice there is already a thread http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/76468-would-better-pr-be-beneficial-in-getting-the-message-across-to-the-general-public/ But the problem remains..what about scientific reports, from different science bodies, that conflict in their findings to future climate scenario on same subject? Such as rainfall scenarios. What report is more significant, if they diverge on their findings? What is the public to make of that,.How can the confliction be given a responsible governmental response in terms of policy .

With schools of marlin turning up in Tasmanian waters regularly, you know something fishy is going on with altering sea currents. Great for the sea fishing sport industry though.

Very interesting. We are certainly observing this phenomena in Tasmania quite acutely, with extensive high pressure ridging in all seasons over recent years, causing almost the complete disappearance of cold fronts, and subsequently big positive temperature anomaly and lack of winter and springtime snow in the highlands.

If it wasn't for tiny pieces of scrap floating around in space we wouldn't have as many shooting stars to checkout at nighttime. Besides, considering that no satellite or manned craft has run into the half a million pieces of scrap over the last few decades with a bad consequence just goes to show it is not much of a problem. The amount of scrap floating around up there is probably akin to Hyde park being completley littered, and then having a gale blow the litter away where it disperses proportionally across the entire skies of Great Britain. That's not pollution in the traditional sense of the word.

Some quotes from Australia's climate commissioner at the time ( Flannery ) in regards to water supply predictions for Australia's most populous cities ( below ). This is where my comment came from, but perhaps I could have phrased it better. Flannery quotes: "Sydney and Brisbane, water supplies are so low they need desalinated water urgently, possibly in as little as 18 months" "The water problem is so severe for Adelaide that it may run out of water by 2009" "I think there is a fair chance Perth will be the 21st century's first ghost metropolis" (Divergence ): "In 5 years there will be no Arctic ice cap" ( 2008 ) Let's see about that one, we don't have long to wait. As climate commisioner, he was obviously basing his remarks upon climate modelling predictions, it was what he was paid to do afterall, and using the term 'extreme' dry mentioned in the IPCC report rather selectively IMO, without giving recourse to its true stated position of "extreme rainfall events" ? There is an alarming difference. The latter is rather ambiguous, and possibly 'normal' when it comes to Australia's climate. Perhaps the overriding issue is water security not meeting population demand...circumstances that the cities have not had to deal with in the past? Flannery was not alone in his predictions, and the IPCC of course is not the only science body that releases climate prognostications. Perhaps the problem here is appropriate communication, and the problem of hyperbole from all sides, not just the usual suspects, because if you don't have a degree of level headedness and accuracy in what you say, it does diminish this entire field of science. I could spend an afternoon finding quotes from other science outlets and spokespersons at the time if I had the time and inclination to do so, but I am not really interested in a nit pick debate about what was said several years ago and their intended meanings. I thought it would be polite however to answer your question, I understand the angle you are coming from in respect to an appreciation of science and expertise, and I do enjoy reading your posts especially in the climate change threads.

You are absolutley correct. Billions of dollars were spent on desalinisation plants along Australia's eastern seaboard during the last El Nino event - in which climate science models at the time were forecasting that the era of natural fresh water supplies were coming to an end. Australians were endlessly told this thru political institutions - time and time again. Along comes the next cyclical rainfall event and these same dams that were due to become unreliable are overflowing ( again ) resulting in downstream flooding. Desalinisation plants also have to keep converting saltwater to freshwater in order to remain functional..they cannot just be turned off.. and it is ironic that these 'drought busters' are now pumping water into Sydney's main dam and contributing to its overflow! I think it just goes to show ( again ) how unreliable climate modelling is when it comes to rainfall prediction. Human activity is far more susceptible to extreme rainfall patterns than increasing temperature (?)...yet climate modelling on this is too fraught to really be taken seriously. ( NorthNSW though probably has a better understanding of how unusual the number of east coast lows has been in recent years in relation to an historical context - it is his home state after all ) Warragamba dam level since 2002; Sydney's main water catchment.

I read on a NZ ski forum that Mount Hutt saw 2.8 metres, with 6 metre drifts !! The last 20 years has given New Zealand a number of monster snow events.

Quite a pronounced cold/frosty spell in Tasmania - one of the most prolonged in terms of extreme overnight lows in inland Tasmania for some 20 years...close to and below -10C in the Great Lake district ( inland Tasmania ) for 3 nights in a row with another 2 likely. This morning, -11.2C..1.8C short of Tasmania's lowest ever recorded temperature ( in the same district ). Hobart on the south east coast is tempered by the sea, but 2 nights in a row within decimel points of zero ( 5 below average ), and the first sub 10 maximum on Friday followed by another on Saturday ( 3 below ). Beautiful crisp sunny days, deep blue sky. Great Lake district, central Tasmania, -11.2 this morning

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/weather/news/article.cfm?c_id=10&objectid=10891248 Looks like being the biggest snow event for New Zealand in terms of disruption ( low level heavy snow ) since 1992 - that was one of the biggest snow events of the 20th century.

Giant, floating umbrella design restores Arctic ice http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/20130607/giant-floating-umbrella-design-restores-arctic-ice

Perhaps the sixth sense rests in most of us, and that is an unconcious rejection of the paranormal - not so much based on a rational argument that what can't be scientifically proved cannot exist, but a subconcious understanding that spirit communion or premonition impulses ( etc ) stifles the progression/evolution of humanity as a collective. How advanced would we be as a species if our existences relied upon tapping into the supernatural as way of life...I would say negatively regressed. Maybe for good reason it has been bred out, and the evolutionary consequence was the field of science, now followed by the rejection of religion?

Its a beautiful place - I camped there for a week a few years ago - very relaxed and so much empty space I thought. Would be great in the wintertime when most of the tourists have left. Pity about the bridge link though. True islands don't have bridges.

No reason why it couldn't happen in the next major west European heatwave event? Up until 2009 in Tasmania the highest temperature on this island was 40.8C at 2 localities in 100 or so years of observations ...but in that year (2009) there were 2 days in which another half a dozen stations broke that particular record, for a new island high of 42.2C top! An astonishing 1.4C rise from record to record! Then this year, Hobart came close to eclipsing that with 41.8C. I think it just goes to show that you never never know.

Autumn in Australia was +0.95C above the 1961-90 average in terms of mean temperature. Rainfall, close to the long-term average, +2%. http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/season/aus/summary.shtml The last 4 seasons: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/season/aus/archive/ Winter 2012: Mean -0.2C Rainfall -17% Spring 2012: Mean +1.05C Rainfall -29% Summer 2012/13: Mean +1.1C Rainfall: -16% Autumn 2013: Mean +0.95C Rainfall: +2%

HOBART ( pop 210,000 ) is Tasmania's capital city. Situated at sealevel at the base of Mount Wellington ( 1270m ). Climate is temperate with a strong maritime influence. May - Last month of autumn Another dry and largely settled month with a mean temperature that once again surpassed the 1981-2010 average. Hobart now has not had a below average temperature month since October 2011 ( 19 months ); in that particular year there were 5 such months, not an especially unusal number. May 2013 started off enthusiastically enough, with a moderate cold SW'ly change bringing a period of overnight showers ( 6mm ) and a snowline to about the 600m level, but the clearance to dry was almost immediate, as the trailing high extended a strong ridge over the island. Temperatures were then on the rise, as the high tracked well to the north east, directing a very mild continental NW'ly airlow over Tasmania for several days. The transition to colder weather came about with an intense low pressure system south of Perth, tracking east- south east, and finally parking itself to the east of Tasmania in a weakened form. This began an eight day stretch of below average daily maxima ( the longest 'cool spell' since June of last year ) with onshore cold SE winds to begin with with low cloud and occasional periods of light showers, then SW-SE winds that were largely dry and very cool, with high pressure ridging circulating around an elongated and fairly stationary high pressure system to the west. Winds eventually turned slightly milder W'ly as high pressure retracted to the Great Australian Bight. The high then crossed to the north of Tasmania, and by months end was centred to the north east, re-introducing very mild temperatures, that were exceptionally high and close to unprecedented for the tail end of autumn. Average maximum: 16.0 ( +0.9 ) Average minimum: 7.1 ( -0.3 ) Rainfall: 23mm ( average 45mm ) Extremes in daily temperature for May ( Records since 1882 ): Highest maximum: 22.4 ( Record 25.7 in 1997 ) Lowest maximum: 11.8 ( Record 6.1 in 1921 ) Highest minimum: 12.7 ( Record 16.2 in 2005 ) Lowest minimum: 1.6 ( Record -1.6 in 1902 )

US forest service scientists? Oh OK..unquestionable validity. How many scientists are out there exactly - worldwide? What actually constitutes the term ' scientist '. How many hundreds of thousands of 'scientific reports' are published every year? There must be hundreds of thousands of reports. What makes just one 'scientific report' more newsworthy than the rest? Is it a paper that projects an extreme outcome, and happens to coincide with a recent event in that field of study? Yes I think so. Be careful people what you read and keep an open mind in regards to papers significance

Listed as critically endangered ( IUCN and Tasmania/Australia legislation ), this fish that walks on the seabed, is found only in the Derwent estuary of Hobart, Tasmania. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qG79B_Bfjc

I think 12C or so is a good number - yes it is very cool, but that feeling of being cocooned in warmth under the doona when your face feels the coolness is a nice feeling of security and peacefulness, it allows for a sound sleep with deep dreams. More typically, it is under 18C, and this is acceptable. No complaints. On the other hand anything over 25C is not bearable what-so- ever. I will always wake up thru the night with a fish out of water reflex, a momentary gulp for air. It is like a mini panic attack, horrible.

You have taken me by surprise as I have been following the daily obs issued by your Smoky Cape lighthouse since you were away, and it occured to me they don't correlate at all with your weekly readings, so I am assuming you are pulling your stats from your own weather station? Anyway whichever way I concede with good grace(!), a sub 10 now appears unlikely until the wintertime here and further sub 20s are more than likely up there. I am having a guess your station is quite sheltered from the sea in lieu of colder night time readings, and warmer by day under onshore NE'lies? My observation based on just a quick comparison of the two sets of data! Hobart's lowest maximum thus far is 11.8 ( 4th ). 4 below average for May. The lowest minimum for the year was this morning at 1.6C ( 6 below ). First light frost in inner Hobart. That was the lowest temperature so early before a winter season since 1994, and up at Liawenee in Tasmania's central plateau, -7C. Oh and those photos are great, quite professional, I like the ones looking toward Canberra from afar, unique perspective.

All mammals suffer heatstress during mid summer heatwave events. That includes us humans. But the individuals that can't cope are often always the chronically ill and aged. An extra few days of high temperatures during the year will not result in a situation where healthy koalas start to drop out of the trees dead. It is important to remember that koala has habitat in different climatic zones in Australia where heatwaves differ in intensity and duration and where average summer temperature varies considerably. Only threat would be to colonies where koala was critically endangered , where individuals were susceptible in the first instance. I am sure the scientist has been misquoted or misinterpreted.

I don't question the individual science report mentioned in the aricle specifically, just the way the piece was written, extrapolating local studies to infer a demise of an entire species. It is not just bad journalism we are dealing here but stark mistruths, symptomatic of publications like this who find no problem in stretching credibility in the name of pursuing an ideological agenda, at all cost. My bugbear is about the truth. It implies an entire species is threatened by a whole range of factors, giving prominence to climate change, when most of these factors mentioned only come into play when local/regional population numbers reach a critical threshold in the first place. Hence the IUCN scale and the like. The vulnerability rating for two states is due to regional population declines only - within these two states. A statewide listing says nothing about the species survival rates, whether there are notable % declines or not. Species populations are never stable and in many cases human interference plays no part in this. We are talking about very big places with very big numbers, most habitats are in total undisturbed areas of all time ( national parks ). Within these two states, koala population in some regions show no signs of stress from any factor. What does climate change and heatwaves got to do with this species survival? This is a nonsence. It simply is a projection of a future threat, and that was actually mentioned someway into the article after a bit of a fantasy ride into it, but these factors would only be detrimental once the koala numbers were to become critical. Is the koala endangered as The Guardian implied ? What does the IUPC say? http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/16892/0 This is also a good refutation of the article. It is simply an opinion piece. But it says it in a better way than I have the ability or time to do it http://hauntingthelibrary.wordpress.com/2013/05/02/more-classic-guardian-spin-koalas-threatened-by-global-warming-development/ I don't dismiss AGW science by the way, not at all. But articles like this don't help the cause, they turn people either into jelly brained lemmings, or worse still, make people question every reputable scientific report ...and where will that end up getting us, this face turn away from science? Its is going to create a preety dangerous global warming and environmental protection hereticism that we have not witnessed before. Every such report like this must put its theme into context.

The study concerns local factors, I mentioned this in my response to the article. The article infers that the population of the species is vulnerable in all of its habitat, or it implies it quite heavily. This is simply not true. The koala is abundant, and its home covers three times the size of the United Kingdom. In the south east of the country, the koala is viewed as a pest species. I gave an example of this by suppling a link to a newspaper article. If scientific opinion shifts to the contrary, then we have a problem. There is no scientific concenus to even remove the koala from the "not threatened" category. There are many categories below this toward endangerment of extinction. This same philosophy applies toward global warming. There are thousands of other plant and animal species in Australia whose numbers are vulnerable enough to be rated as such. The koala is not one of them! The article is a sensationalist, manipulated beatup. Wiki

Koala habitat distribution map: The koala can be found in an area equivalent to the size of 3 United Kingdoms. - The koala population is so widespread and numbers are so plentiful enough that it is not nationally or internationaly listed as vulnerable. It is not only found in densely forested gum habitat but in semi arid regions where there is limited tree cover. - Populations are vulnerable only locally. This is cheifly due to naturally occuring disease in semi arid areas of Queensland. The major threat to koala habitat in coastal Queensland ( chiefly the built up south east corner ) and parts of coastal New South Wales is due to urbanisation. - Local vulnerabilities are dealt with by stringent council and state guidelines which limit development and restrict land use activities. - Because there is now a national vulnerability rating for koala populations in NSW and Queensland major development projects have to pass strict federal environmental guidelines aswell, or are canned altogether. - Because the koala is a national and international 'icon', 'environmental noise' about the threat to the koala from environmental groups is naturally overplayed. These organisations rely after all on emotional driven sentiment. - Climate change has not dramatically altered koala habitat, which covers 600,000square miles thru many different climate zones and forest types. Climate change modelling which I think is what the author means, did predict a warming and drier climate. Since the flooding disasters of 2010-12 modelling is now suggesting warmer weather with yoyo swings between extreme dry and floods. This could increase forest habitat and semi arid survival. - Heatwaves have never posed a threat to koalas. Australian summers have always been punctuated with heatwaves. Heatwaves, even more regular ones, would only pose a threat a diseased animals or populations. - Koalas have always found a home in town parks and leafy suburbs, and many populations have a well preserved sanctuary here. -...and lastly the state of Victoria has an over population of koalas which threaten vast swathes of forest on which they feed! The estimated population in this state alone runs into the many tens of thousands. http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2012/10/10/352819_news.html Tut tut The Guardian!

^ It was beanie weather that is for sure! Fresh snow seems to give great definition to all the natural contour lines, makes it appear as if the summit is closer than its height suggests. More snow tonight. Question is, will you have a sub 20 max before Hobart has its first sub 10 maximum for the year? Game on! Sub 10 maximum in Hobart ( Records since 1882 ): Earliest: February 23rd 1964 ( 9.6 ) and March 22nd 1925 ( 8.9 ) A sub 10 has occured 12X in April; most recent 1973 Latest: July 22nd 1988 ( 9.6 ) Earliest for these years: 2000...May 28th 2001...May 17th 2002...June 17th 2003...June 22nd 2004...May 4th 2005...May 25th 2006...May 3rd 2007...June 1st 2008...July 20th 2009...June 10th 2010...June 11th 2011...June 8th 2012...June 5th 2013...?

HOBART ( pop 210,000 ) is Tasmania's capital city, situated at sealevel and backed by a 1270m mountain range. April - Mid autumn 17 consecutive months of above average monthly temperature almost came to end this month and it was only due to rounding that made this the 18th month on the trot that was warmer than the corresponding monthly average of 1981-2010. After a settled first half with high pressure centres just to the west and to the south east, a modest cold change from the south west brought the first mountain snow for the year, settling to 800m. Two or three days followed that were mostly cloudy and rather cold, with onshore SSE winds. After this a big change in the weather pattern unfolded, with high pressure migrating to northern latitudes ( over northern NSW ) as intense low pressure, well to Tasmania's south, trekked a little closer. This left Tasmania in a broad westerly airstream which was very windy at times with occasional gales, with embedded fronts bringing rain to the west and just a shower or two to Hobart and the more shltered eastern side of the island. Average maximum: 17.9 ( +0.1 ) Average minimum: 9.4 ( -- ) Rainfall: 21mm ( average 53mm ) Extremes in daily temperature for April ( Records since 1882 ): Highest maximum: 25.0 ( Record 30.6 in 1941 ) Lowest maximum: 12.5 ( Record 7.7 in 1967 ) Highest minimum: 14.7 ( Record 18.6 in 1959 ) Lowest minimum: 5.7 ( Record 0.7 in 1888 )